No, none. But I do eagerly await your evidence to show that this is genuine. Seriously I do.

The phraseology is so high school, the fact they claim that Reddit is more intellectual than anything, the fact they allege they're dominating on Reddit, it's just not something that rings true in any way shape or form.

But how about that bet?? If you're so sure Trump is going to win then let's have it. Pick your charity (even the despicable Trump Foundation) and we'll make a bet witnesses by everyone who reads this thread. I'll even start a new thread dedicated to it so people can follow.

Thank you for deflecting, being disingenuous and not responding to direct challenges.

Your cowardice and lack of morals have been noted by everyone, and we now know definitively that you lack a spine as well as a moral compass.

I still eagerly await your evidence that the supposed document is real. Don't forget the formum rules now. You made the claim, now back it up with supporting evidence or retract it. I merely challenged your assertion.

So let's see it.

Oh and I note you keep avoiding my direct challenge to a bet. Too scared? Don't really believe Trump stands a chance?? What is it.

Really, you have no idea how modern political campaigns work. The idea is to to look at a community, see who's eligible to vote, and to motivate those people who lean towards your candidate to actually cast their ballot. If they aren't registered, get them registered. If they can't get to the polls, arrange for someone to drive them to the polls. And if their support isn't strong, figure out a way to motivate that support.

Polling is a good way to figure out what sort of campaign message "resonates" within a specific subpopulation. Unfortunately, the polls have to be designed to sample the target population. And that's hard to do.

Campaigns really aren't interested in how "likely voters" nationwide are intending to vote. They're much more interested in cobbling together those 270 votes to actually win the election. They're interested in turning eligible voters into registered voters and turning specific subsets of registered voters into "likely voters".

So-- yeah. Oversample monolingual hispanics if you want to know if a campaign message is working among monolingual Hispanics.

As for "media", the campaigns are talking about advertising-- how to design an ad for such and such a demographic, and where to show that ad to reach that demographic. If the ad works, and they turn out on election, congrats. You've done your part for your candidate. If they stay home, or, worse yet, vote for someone else, congrats you've just wasted your money and volunteer resources. Polling that actually samples this targeted population will help you avoid errors.

The mass media want polls that will accurately predict the outcome of election day. The campaigns want a way to test their strategies. So the campaigns are often using different polling techniques. It would be nice if the campaigns didn't succumb to delusions, but in the era of low turnout, there's a lot of room to target gotv efforts.

Hey @Bobby Corwen , just another manic Monday, huh? Trump now trailing in 2 of 3 polls that had him leading (LAT and IBD). Sucks to have all you eggs in the Rasmussen basket. Hurry, time for you to go read some more Bill Mitchell tweets. Teehee.

Thank you for deflecting, being disingenuous and not responding to direct challenges.

Your cowardice and lack of morals have been noted by everyone, and we now know definitively that you lack a spine as well as a moral compass.

I still eagerly await your evidence that the supposed document is real. Don't forget the formum rules now. You made the claim, now back it up with supporting evidence or retract it. I merely challenged your assertion.

So let's see it.

Oh and I note you keep avoiding my direct challenge to a bet. Too scared? Don't really believe Trump stands a chance?? What is it.

Click to expand...

A classy gentleman like me doesn't participate in betting contests.

In response to your question though the type of practice is already evident so that document illustrates something that is already common sense.

I find the owner of this car's mindset very repugnant... I mean who would pay good money for an ugly car paying lip-service to panel vans of old? It's like Chevy tried to mimic Chrysler's PT Cruiser in every way, including the ugly.

As for this thread, I'm just glad the US's two year long election process will finally be over. If people are easily dissuaded from voting because of polls, you deserve what you get. (For recent reference see Great Britian, Brexit vote)

In response to your question though the type of practice is already evident so that document illustrates something that is already common sense.

Click to expand...

So you DON'T actually believe what you're posting? Very telling, I think that's the very definition of a troll. And don't believe for one second that you have any class as it's abundantly clear you don't.

So just to be clear, you have zero evidence that what you're posting is in any way, shape or form legitimate - yet you expect anyone to simply "believe you"? Given your continued flip/flop and misunderstanding of very basic ideas, I'm sure you'll forgive everyone for doubting your sincerity.

So you DON'T actually believe what you're posting? Very telling, I think that's the very definition of a troll. And don't believe for one second that you have any class as it's abundantly clear you don't.

I see the pendulum has swung back to the nervous "too soon to call" posture.

Click to expand...

I do believe it. I highly doubt Trump will lose any battleground states.

-He is winning the early vote in Florida after his hype 12k+ ppl rally.
-He is up +3 in Texas. Its RCP so its more like +10
-Libs lagging behind 2012 pace in Ohio and Iowa

Combine this with evidence from social media such as Twitter and Facebook and looking at and comparing the hype levels and numbers of support between the two, its quite obvious my theory that nobody is really exited for Hillary is and will effect expected Democratic turnout.

First of all, Matzzie doesn't appear to be talking about public polling — nor does it make sense that he would be, since public polls from media outlets are developed by pollsters who work for or with those outlets. Matzzie's talking about polling that's done by campaigns and political action committees to inform media buys. In other words, before campaigns spend $200,000 on a flight of TV spots, they'll poll on the messages in those ads and figure out what to say to whom and then target that ad to those people as best they can.

The problem is that it can be hard to find enough people to get robust enough sample sizes to offer the necessary information. Normal polling in a state will usually have no problem getting enough white people in the mix to evaluate where they stand, but you may need to specifically target more black or Hispanic voters to get a statistically relevant sample size.

The chart below shows how sample size and margin of error correlate.

[see chart in link]

Small samples of poll respondents mean a huge margin of error. Until you get to about 400 people in your sample, the margin of error drops quickly; once you pass 400, though, it doesn't change a whole lot. (This is why a lot of polls use sample sizes of 400 to 600.) If you're trying to figure out how to craft a message to Hispanic voters in Colorado, for example, you're going to need to seek out more Hispanic voters in the state to include in the survey. This is called an oversample, since it's an intentional effort to include more people from a certain group in your sampling.

I do believe it. I highly doubt Trump will lose any battleground states.

-He is winning the early vote in Florida after his hype 12k+ ppl rally.
-He is up +3 in Texas. Its RCP so its more like +10
-Libs lagging behind 2012 pace in Ohio and Iowa

Click to expand...

Texas is not a battleground state. Florida is close. It always is. Neither candidate is winning nor losing there yet. I do think Trump could win Ohio and for some odd reason looks to most certainly win Iowa, but that is not enough to get him over the finish line.

As for not losing any other battleground state? Really? He's not winning Colorado. He isn't winning Virginia. Nevada looks doubtful. Pennsylvania? Don't see that happening either. On top of that he might even lose Utah which isn't a battleground state.

Well I said before Obama, didnt count JFK ok I got schooled but still didnt Nixon win all states by a landslide ?

JFK got killed, Clinton impeached but after Bush 2 they locked all the mayor votes.

Click to expand...

Well all the gays vote Democratic. All the Hispanics vote Democratic. All the blacks vote Democratic. All the people into BDSM and group sex vote Democratic. All the single women vote Democratic. All the environmentalists vote Democratic.

Well all the gays vote Democratic. All the Hispanics vote Democratic. All the blacks vote Democratic. All the people into BDSM and group sex vote Democratic. All the single women vote Democratic. All the environmentalists vote Democratic.

Well all the gays vote Democratic. All the Hispanics vote Democratic. All the blacks vote Democratic. All the people into BDSM and group sex vote Democratic. All the single women vote Democratic. All the environmentalists vote Democratic.

That leaves gun owners and racists who vote Republican.

Click to expand...

No. There's a sizable number of closeted, self-hating gays and freaky conservatives who vote Republican. They just lie about what they do behind closed doors and instead portray themselves as Christian conservatives preaching family values instead of letting their freak flags fly.

MacRumors attracts a broad audience
of both consumers and professionals interested in
the latest technologies and products. We also boast an active community focused on
purchasing decisions and technical aspects of the iPhone, iPod, iPad, and Mac platforms.